KRELF Review Meeting
Friday, November 30, 2012
Members Present: Alyson Heare, Brian Kern, Alex Rich, Tom Javins, Eva Rocke, Dennis Daneke, Eamon
Ormseth, Len Broberg
Members Absent: Micah Nielsen, Rosi Keller, Blake DeShaw, Alyson Heare
Human Powered Vehicle (Nathan Ferro) - $6,000
Len asked where the cells and battery were that KRELF funded last time. Felt strongly that other funds
should be found to support these projects and that repurposing should be done. Where is recharging
station or other repurposed item that was supposed to come out of the last proposal/project? Solar
vehicle proposals need to show additional financial support and that all of the “asks” need to be
demonstrated. Want them to amend proposal to not include travel. Committee decided to amend
amount to $2800 and table
MORE INFO NEEDED…NOT SURE HOW MUCH OF THIS WILL BE FUNDED
Wind Turbine (Zach Rambo)- $10.5k
Brad has money for a tower and there may be $250 taken out of the budget b/c they might get the
tower for free. Brian vouched for the project as being do-able and a good demo. Len asked whether this
project meets the core values of KRELF. His point is that if this project is so core to the COT program
(classroom equipment), why isn’t the COT paying for some it? KRELF could chip in a little, but it doesn’t
really fit our guidelines. Len liked the idea of KRELF throwing in a few extra bucks to “close the deal” if
there were other funding sources chipping in. Only way it would be really worth our time is if there was
a great big KRELF sign on it. At this point, KRELF is not going to provide funding b/c we don’t feel like it’s
an appropriate use of $10k.
HVAC at SRC (Alyson Heare) - $71.4k
Pretty good payback, that’s the best feature; where is Brian Fruit on this? Still scared of payback being
so fast? Multiplier is so generous that the payback is pretty safe; Committee would be happy to offer a
payback buffer; Len moves to approve the project for funding and to grant Eva and Tom permission to
adjust the payback period to up to 4 years; Alyson suggested we also include in the budget some funds
for signage, since this is not a particularly visible project
APPROVED FOR FUNDING
Insulation at Lomasson (Eric Testerman)- $22.6k
Brian led discussion on this project b/c he worked closely w/ Eric on this proposal; payback is just over a
year, making the project particularly appealing; proposal asks for 6 year payback extension; Dennis had
a problem with this and suggested we shorten the payback period and, if they want to spend the savings
on other efficiency projects, they can come back to KRELF for those funds. Tom mentioned that Michelle
Jensen has lots more projects on her list (options) and that we could conceivably add more projects to
this. Len moves to approve the project w/ a payback of 3 years. Len amended the motion to include a
payback of up to 3 years and approved project funding at $22.6k.
APPROVED FOR FUNDING
Recycling Bins for Student Rec Center (Blake DeShaw)- $7.5
Committee needs more info on the actual products. Convince us! We’d like options for recycling
bins…seems really expensive for recycling bins and want to be convinced that this makes sense in terms
of behavior change, etc. Funding is more competitive now, so need to do a better job of drafting a
compelling proposal.
Eco-Rep Program in Res Life (Alex Rich)- $8k
Dennis wants to wait until the Smart Meters are installed to see quantifiable energy savings. Some
discussion around metrics and whether we could ask to see quantifiable savings or changes. Proposal
needs edits and polishing. Look at Nicky Phear’s summary of the climate discussion and whether we can
use that info to demonstrate support for this project as well. We should explore whether EcoReps
becoming a permanent part of KRELF and fall into the “training” and outreach category w/in KRELF.
NEED MORE INFO AND A NEW PROPOSAL
Sustainable Buildings Initiative (Zach Brown)- $35k
Committees
Water Refill Stations (Alex Chandler)- $1.5-3k
Len wants to encourage the Business School and likes the counting feature. Would like to see a proposal
that includes one of the refilling stations and some gooseneck spouts and a more concrete number for
labor and installation costs.
Review of Guiding Principles: reduce UM’s impact on the environment, demonstrate repayment thru
savings (except those w/ outreach and behavior change), approval by appropriate officers, submitted
under an umbrella department that can repay savings; will not support already-mandated programs;
preference given to those that reduce the greatest quantity of GHG; impact social and environmental
sustainability; must review for impacts of the project (come up w/ a scorecard for the next round of
proposals)
-
Should student travel to competitions, should competitions, and should equipment for
competitions be funded?? (Question from Tom)
Other notes:
Before review of the grants, some discussion was had over the total amount to be allocated, SBI needs,
and how we want to approach projects we know will be coming up next semester as well. Brian asked
the group if we want to set aside funds for next semester and work with less than our annual allocation
this funding cycle. For two rounds of funding, KRELF has approximately $78.5k allocated to grants. This
fall’s grant requests total $75,120.
Tom gave a brief overview of SBI for committee members who weren’t familiar with the whole initiative
and long-term plans. Len noted that we should check in w/ Rosi about grant allocations and how we
hold recipients accountable for the funds. We should be checking in with recipients to see if funds were
spent and if they were spent as intended.
Dennis noted that he thinks SBI is a big worthwhile investment b/c the data it produces will potentially
inform the KRLEF committee of the viability of later proposals. Dennis said he wasn’t opposed to funding
the full $35k. Alison asked for more explanation of SBI and why it’s not being considered for a loan. Tom
explained that the savings are not necessarily concrete and easily identified and there isn’t one specific
department that could sign the promissory note and pay the $35k back if the savings aren’t realized. Len
expressed concern that we haven’t seen a concrete commitment from main hall or Board of Regents
indicating their support for this initiative. Maybe we should say that no more funding will be allocated
until matching funds are contributed by the other parties involved. Len also expressed concern that SBI,
in asking for student funding support, is taking some of the cost for efficiency improvements off the
back of the state and putting it on the students, which he doesn’t think is right.
Len says we don’t fund trips. Says student involvement in competitions isn’t really what KRELF is
intended to fund.
Len motioned to allocate $3,000 for outreach for KRELF.